If the state’s ethics commission failed the public last week by refusing to investigate a lawmaker for potentially violating ethics rules, lawmakers have failed the commission by neglecting to appoint its fifth member.

This problem can be remedied in the short term by naming the fifth member, who must not be a member of a major political party. In the longer term, a legislative advisory group on ethics should review the stringent requirements for the independent member and suggest that they be revised.

Last week, the Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices deadlocked 2-to-2 on whether to pursue an investigation of Rep. Thomas Saviello, who is the environmental manager at International Paper Co.’s Jay mill and was a member of the Legislature’s Natural Resources Committee. Facing allegations that he used his committee assignment to benefit his company, Rep. Saviello asked the ethics commission to investigate the matter.

When the commission met in February to consider his situation, Rep. Saviello, an independent from Wilton, withdrew his request for an investigation. The commission then tabled a similar complaint from the Conservation Law Foundation, which charged that Rep. Saviello used his committee position to crafter weaker rules for IP and that he bargained with the Department of Environmental Protection to drop an enforcement action against the mill. Rep. Saviello resigned from the Natural Resources Committee shortly after the February meeting.

The commission again took up the CLF complaint last week with its two Republican members voting not to investigate. The two Democrats disagreed, but since the vote was tied the matter was dropped.

Rep. Saviello’s lawyer, Charles Harvey, told the commission that investigating the complaint would turn the ethics commission into a “roving police force of the Legislature.” That is the commission’s job. Further it should also be the roving ethics police force for the public and by failing to investigate this complaint merely because it was not brought by a lawmaker set a bad precedent and will further erode public confidence.

This outcome may have been avoided if the tie-breaking member of the commission had been present, but that seat has been vacant for almost a year.

In 2001, lawmakers changed the ethics commission appointment process to increase their say. Previously, commission members had been appointed by the governor. Under the new law, each party caucus submits a list of three names to the governor who picks an appointee from the lists. However, the requirements are higher – too high – for the independent member, who serves as the commission chair.

Each caucus must agree on the list of three candidates that is sent to the governor. Only former University of Maine System Chancellor Terrence MacTaggart has cleared this hurdle. He served a one-year term on the commission and then stayed on for another six months awaiting a replacement. He left the commission last April and the seat has been vacant since then.

A recently convened legislative advisory committee on ethics will soon begin reviewing the state’s ethics laws. In addition to recommending changes in language to allow for citizen complaints to the ethics commission, the committee should also suggest that the requirements for the independent commission member be revised so it is easier to find candidates for the post.

In the meantime, lawmakers have a brief time to agree on the commission’s fifth member before a contentious election season gets under way.